After a DUI arrest in Florida, a person will be asked to submit a sample of their breath for analysis. Also referred to as taking the breath test. Upon refusing to provide a sample, the arresting officer is supposed to read a warning that the license will be suspended. Sometimes, people change their mind and provide a sample immediately. What if the officer says it is too late to blow and announces the arrestee has refused?
In the realm of criminal cases one way a defense attorney can protect a client is to argue self-defense. Some years ago, there were reports of a 'Warning Shot Bill' that would allow Floridians to fire a warning shot. There is no law that specifically 'allows a warning shot'. What in the stand your ground law caused the confusion that has me answering similar questions years later?
Self Defense has been an available affirmative defense to criminal cases since the dawn of society. Florida also has long acknowledged the fundamental right to use force in defense of self or others. The essential elements of self-defense have stayed about the same. A person may use deadly force when it is reasonably necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to the person or to another person. The procedure and burden of proof required to make a self-defense argument has changed.
In DUI defense a common question or problem involves the "ignition interlock device". The law on the ignition interlock device states that the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles "shall require the placement of a department-approved ignition interlock device for any person convicted of committing an offense of driving under the influence as specified".
In criminal and traffic cases a common concern is that the officer requested the driver or other person to exit the vehicle. There is a line of thought that being removed from the vehicle requires a safety concern or other good reason. Some may question what issue(s) exist getting out of the car, others do not like the feeling of being seized, however in the context of criminal cases, exiting from a vehicle often discloses damaging evidence.
In the drug defense subset of criminal defense an amazing number of cases begin at a traffic stop. One example is issues with the license plate or tag, whether it is the infamous tag light, expired tag or an obscured tag. These stops are difficult to defend without a video showing the cops to be incorrect (or worse).
A frustrating issue defending those accused of Driving Under the Influence or DUI, has been the lack of a definition of the word "impaired" in the standard jury instructions. Without a breath, blood or urine result or sample the State of Florida must prove that the person is "impaired" in order to convict a person of DUI. This is especially true if the accused is DUI by drugs or prescriptions. However, the Florida Supreme Court in issuing jury instructions has sought fit to leave the word "impaired" undefined.
Tony Stewart's crash that killed another driver, Kevin Ward Jr., will be investigated by law enforcement. A few minutes into the business day and I am already being asked "for what?" While some feel this is an incident for which Mr. Ward waived any civil actions by assuming the risk of death when he exited his vehicle and tried to confront a race car,, there are others that want our government to investigate all incidents of death with an eye towards prosecution.
Carrying a concealed firearm is a felony criminal offense in Florida with several exceptions that almost eat the rule. All of the exceptions, of course, require that the person is not otherwise prohibited from carrying a firearm concealed or otherwise. For example, the exceptions do not apply to people who have an active domestic violence injunction, are on probation, or are a convicted felon.
Criminal cases, especially those involving firearms are significant and tense starting at the roadside encounter. The recent appellate case of Rose v. State from the First District Court of Appeal, in which the person was convicted of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, is a scary reminder of how interactions with law enforcement can go horribly wrong, fast. The Defendant was convicted of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.